Raid Rule Modifications

[CosmicWhaleShark 2487]

Does anyone actually have something against these potential reforms? It seems like a rather solid change to consider.

[tnoy23 202]

This thread has a purpose. Follow it.

 

In the words of Wardog, does anyone actually have anything against these suggested reforms, suggested in the first post, and in the first post only, not past events nor the definition of occupying a city?

[DrakeHaze. 2490]

Does anyone actually have something against these potential reforms? It seems like a rather solid change to consider.

The last one is the only iffy one as of right now. Also as said previously anyone could just make a non-affiliated raid group to raid people, how do you plan to warclaim them if they don't have land or are affiliated with a nation? The only thing I can think of is warclaiming the race they are.

[Birdwhisperer 1173]

Occupying a city seems like the kind of thing you'd need to make a warclaim for, so I don't see why not to make a rule against it during normal raids. It's a raid, after all, not conquest or occupation.

 

Probably the best suggestion in this thread, though, is not being able to raid if you deny a warclaim. It seems a perfectly fair trade to me, if you don't want to deal with a warclaim don't make the other party deal with raids.

[CosmicWhaleShark 2487]

The last one is the only iffy one as of right now. Also as said previously anyone could just make a non-affiliated raid group to raid people, how do you plan to warclaim them if they don't have land or are affiliated with a nation? The only thing I can think of is warclaiming the race they are.

 

This happened in Anthos, whenever PvP became default coupled with the removal of VAs. A lot of random Orcs showed up, simply put. The solution to this was to put restrictions to the amount of raids that could occur to a settlement, I believe it was one every 48 hours.

 

Eventually, this discouraged the amounts of random raids and RP was returned to relative normalcy. Perhaps we should return to the previous regulations, considering it was rather effective.

[DrakeHaze. 2490]

This happened in Anthos, whenever PvP became default coupled with the removal of VAs. A lot of random Orcs showed up, simply put. The solution to this was to put restrictions to the amount of raids that could occur to a settlement, I believe it was once every 48 hours.

 

Eventually, this discouraged the amounts of random raids and RP was returned to relative normalcy. Perhaps we should return to the previous regulations, considering it was rather effective.

Agreed. If it worked before there was no point in changing it. The only problem with these rules that are suggested is there leaves too many loopholes. Raiders unaffiliated with nations, baiting a nation to raid you through RP to then enforce a warclaim on them, and the 'counter-raids' which would also cause a forced warclaim. What I mean by counter-raid is if a group of raiders is pushed back to their fort and then have to fend off the force they were attacking, thus leading to them being raided.

[CosmicWhaleShark 2487]

If a group of raiders does become prominent enough to the extent they actually build a fort rather than changing a skin at their main character's location, great, we'll deal with them accordingly.

 

This is/was more to discourage a large amount of random raiders, random because they are in fact randomly generated for the sole purpose of raiding. If a settlement was already raided within a two day span, there's no point to switching over to your Orc or 'nameless' Human. Eventually, people just stopped doing it altogether.

 

Also, you could just actually do some diplomacy RP, maybe make efforts to assist the raided nation in dealing with these rogue individuals that are tarnishing your kind's reputation. Thus there's no excuse to warclaim your faction directly. There's RP to be had from this, if it does occur. The grace period is just to prevent 'trolls' from PvPing for the sake of PvP. One day to prepare for a raid, one day to RP whatever you like to your heart's content, rather balanced.

[Cyndikate 2302]

The issue is that certain people perpetuate war and conflict RPly and then seek to hide behind OOC barriers when repercussions come their way.

This.

Fix that before proposing raid rules.

[Campor 28]

This.

Fix that before proposing raid rules.

I think that was more directed to nations who raid and then refuse a warclaim because they can, even if it makes no sense for the raided group to not respond with full force.

 

These rules, I think, would promote a lot better RP between nations and put some form of buffer between all the (in the end pointless) raid spamming that's being done on almost all sides right now. The vast majority of the raids add absolutely nothing.

[DrakeHaze. 2490]

If a group of raiders does become prominent enough to the extent they actually build a fort rather than changing a skin at their main character's location, great, we'll deal with them accordingly.

 

This is/was more to discourage a large amount of random raiders, random because they are in fact randomly generated for the sole purpose of raiding. If a settlement was already raided within a two day span, there's no point to switching over to your Orc or 'nameless' Human. Eventually, people just stopped doing it altogether.

 

Also, you could just actually do some diplomacy RP, maybe make efforts to assist the raided nation in dealing with these rogue individuals that are tarnishing your kind's reputation. Thus there's no excuse to warclaim your faction directly. There's RP to be had from this, if it does occur. The grace period is just to prevent 'trolls' from PvPing for the sake of PvP. One day to prepare for a raid, one day to RP whatever you like to your heart's content, rather balanced.

You say there is diplomacy RP to be had from this, but that is false. All attempts to discuss diplomacy have been met with IC insults and letters. So there wouldn't really be a way to diplomacy RP and would lead straight into a warclaim, for either side really.

[Cyndikate 2302]

I think that was more directed to nations who raid and then refuse a warclaim because they can, even if it makes no sense for the raided group to not respond with full force.

 

These rules, I think, would promote a lot better RP between nations and put some form of buffer between all the (in the end pointless) raid spamming that's being done on almost all sides right now. The vast majority of the raids add absolutely nothing.

Heres what I think. If they attack other settlements, they are not allowed to deny warclaims. Period. If you dont want to get your asses handed to you, stop pissing the other settlements off.

[Destroyer_Bravo 1052]

Heres what I think. If they attack other settlements, they are not allowed to deny warclaims. Period. If you dont want to get your asses handed to you, stop pissing the other settlements off.

But theoretically the high elves could literally take the piss out of every single nation and get away scot-free, which seems to be an issue that cannot be addressed through this system (on purpose?).

[Birdwhisperer 1173]

But theoretically the high elves could literally take the piss out of every single nation and get away scot-free, which seems to be an issue that cannot be addressed through this system (on purpose?).

High elves would be held to the same no-raiding rules.

[Cyndikate 2302]

High elves would be held to the same no-raiding rules.

Except they rarely raid anyway.

[DrakeHaze. 2490]

High elves would be held to the same no-raiding rules.

As said previously, this will result in baiting nations to force a war claim. If you antagonize a nation, you cannot be upset when they raid you at whatever time of day they want.